United States v. Commonwealth Energy System

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that FRCP 6(b) “works in conjunction with Rule 25(a)(1) to provide the intended flexibility in enlarging the time for substitution”
• noting that “plaintiff’s counsel struggled to find a proper substitute for [defendant]”
• considering similar practical problems as part of arr excusable neglect analysis under Civil Rule 6(b)
• granting plaintiff's request to amend caption even though it was made over four months after the 90-day period had run, observing that “Notwithstanding- the mandatory language in Rule 25(a
• granting plaintiff’s motion for late substitution of defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).